DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the cartridge base". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The cartridge base is introduced in claim 10, however claim 13 depends from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10, 12, 14, 30-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Baron et al. (US 2010/0176155A1).
Baron discloses in reference to claim:
1. A cartridge system for making a beverage, wherein the cartridge system can be inserted into a beverage preparation machine 10, the cartridge system comprising:
a. a cartridge 16/100 comprising a reservoir filled with a beverage substance 11 wherein the cartridge has a cartridge wall 16; and
b. a cartridge receptacle 90 connected to the cartridge 16, wherein the cartridge receptacle comprises: a mixing chamber 94, which can be brought into fluidic connection with the reservoir 16; and a fluid feed opening (at 84) into the mixing chamber;
wherein the cartridge system has:
a sealing element 19 for closing the reservoir; wherein a seal is formed between the cartridge 16 and the cartridge receptacle 90 with the aid of a sealing means 19; wherein the sealing element is formed with the aid of or by a screw cap 80; wherein the screw cap 80 has a seal 85 and a bore 83; wherein a mouth region 18 of the cartridge 16 has a thread A for screwing on the screw cap 80; wherein the screw cap 80 is screwed onto the cartridge 16; and wherein the cartridge receptacle 90 is secured on the cartridge and/or the screw cap after the screw cap has been screwed on.
PNG
media_image1.png
1232
905
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the sealing means 19 is designed as part of the sealing element, and/or wherein the sealing means is an element which is separate from the sealing element and is arranged, between the cartridge and the cartridge receptacle.
3. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the sealing means has a sealing ring 19, a full-area sealing means with a bore, and/or a foam.
4. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the sealing element 120 can be mounted on the cartridge wall 100, wherein the cartridge wall comprises, no flange for mounting the sealing element.
5. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the cartridge wall 16 comprises a flange 18 for mounting the sealing element 19 .
6. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 5, wherein the flange 18 is designed as a mouth region of the cartridge wall 16 at an edge of the cartridge wall. See figure 5
7. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 5, wherein the flange is designed as a radially outward-projecting region of the cartridge wall. See figure 5
10. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the cartridge comprises a main body 16 of a cup-shaped design, wherein the main body is formed with the aid of the cartridge wall 16, which is closed on (at least) one side by a cartridge base C, and wherein the main body comprises the reservoir. Note that no special meaning is associated with the phrase “cup-shaped”. Note further that cartridge 16 is closed on one side by a base wall and the main body comprises a reservoir.
12. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the cartridge wall 16 has a connecting means 89 for connecting the cartridge to the cartridge receptacle, wherein the connecting means comprises one or more latching grooves, and/or one or more latching beads, and/or one or more undercuts, and/or an external thread.
14. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 12, wherein the connecting means B is arranged adjacent to a secondary region of the cartridge wall D, offset in the direction of the cartridge base C.
PNG
media_image2.png
328
579
media_image2.png
Greyscale
30. A beverage preparation machine 10/20, comprising the cartridge system as claimed in claim 1.
31. A process for manufacturing the cartridge system as claimed in claim 1, comprising: in a first process step, forming the cartridge wall 16 (implied) of the cartridge; in a second process step, securing a sealing element 19 on the cartridge; and in a third process step, connecting the cartridge to the cartridge 16 receptacle 90; wherein a seal 19 is formed between the cartridge 16 and the cartridge receptacle 90 before, during and/or after the third process step with the aid of a sealing means 80.
32. The process as claimed in claim 31, wherein the sealing means (surface of 19) is formed and/or arranged on an upper side of the sealing element 19 facing away from the cartridge 16 before the third process step and/or during the third process step and before, during, and/or after the second process step.
33. The process as claimed in claim 31, wherein, in the first process step, the cartridge wall 16 of the cartridge 16, comprising a flange 18, is formed, and wherein, in the second process step, the sealing element 19 is secured on the cartridge with the aid of the flange 18.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. The Supreme Court in KSR noted that the analysis supporting a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should be made explicit.
EXEMPLARY RATIONALES
Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way;
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
(E) “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;
(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 8-9, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron et al. (US 2010/0176155A1) in view of Cafaro et al. (US 2018/0155091A1).
Baron discloses the claimed invention except in reference to claim:
8. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 5, wherein the flange is formed in a fully circumferential manner on the cartridge wall around the entire circumference of the cartridge wall.
9. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 5, wherein the flange is formed with the aid of a thickened region of the cartridge wall.
11. The cartridge system as claimed in claim 10, wherein the cartridge wall 16 comprises a secondary region D which is arranged adjacent to a flange 18 in a direction of the cartridge base C, and wherein the cartridge wall 16 has a smaller wall thickness in the secondary region than in a region of the flange.
Cafaro discloses a similar cartridge for a beverage device including a cartridge 16, a seal 31 and a cartridge receptable wherein a flange is formed in a fully circumferential manner on the cartridge wall 32 around the entire circumference of the cartridge wall, and wherein the flange is formed with the aid of a thickened region 12 (see figure) of the cartridge wall.
.
PNG
media_image3.png
762
839
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art given the knowledge of Cafaro, to substitute the known configuration of Cafaro for the similar configuration of Baron as a matter of design choice where the shape of the reservoir 16 requires more symmetry.
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron et al. (US 2010/0176155A1).
Baron discloses the claimed invention except in reference to claim:
34. The process as claimed in claim 31, wherein, in an intermediate step carried out before the third process step, the cartridge receptacle is produced by injection molding of plastic.
Note that the use of injection molding as a method of manufacturing plastic parts is well known in the art and the use thereof to produce any component for which such a molding process would be suitable would be an obvious design choice by a skilled artisan.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOR S CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4776. The examiner can normally be reached M,W-F 6:30-10:30, 12-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 5712705569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOR S CAMPBELL/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761
tsc